Intrinsic Motivation

Our recent discussion in class has focused heavily on the type of things that motivate us. We discussed that in the classroom setting, grades seem to be a very effective and ubiquitous motivator. Although some problems with the concept of grades (i.e. working to “beat the system” and not learn the material) were discussed, we decided that grades were probably one of the most consistent and effective motivators for class work.

However, and somewhat unfortunately, in our discussion we never were able to get past the topic of school to talk about other situations, especially ones where the motivation for doing well was more intrinsic in nature. Surely there are many things that we do and put effort into, not because we are forced to, but rather because we want to.

At the risk of talking too much about school (I’ll touch on other topic later), I do have one experience with I feel is worth noting. One of my favorite classes in college so far has been the CHP course MATH 199, “Mathematics in Art and Music”. It was very clear from the outset of the class that grades were not the focus of the course, and that any student who put effort into the class would get an A. While in some for some this might have provided an excuse to slack off, this was not the case for me. Personally, I felt freed to enjoy the course to its full potential. I love both math and music, so I found the course content to be extraordinarily interesting. Therefore, I ended up working hard to learn in the class, not because of the pressure of grades, but because I truly enjoyed the material and wanted to learn more.

I would also mention that, since homeworks and tests weren’t really graded, per se, I was free to explore the material to learn what was going on, without worrying about getting every little detail right. However, as many of you are probably thinking, because I was interested in the course, even if it would have been graded strictly, I would still have done well. Overall, I was very glad that I took the course, as it gave me the opportunity to learn something new just for the sake of learning it.

I should note that this doesn’t mean that I haven’t learned from or enjoyed my other classes. This class was simply a neat learning opportunity. Also, if the class had been on a subject that I wasn’t as interested in, my experience would have probably been totally different.

I will now turn my attention to other situations, since the discussion of grades and school has been thoroughly beaten to death.

When thinking about things that we do or learn because we want to, not because we are forced to, the concept of hobbies immediately comes to mind. As I have already mentioned, I am interested in music. Therefore, I am motivated to learn new songs on the piano, or learn how to sing better, simply because I want to.

Just stating this, however, brings to mind the difference, as stated in the “Expert Mind” article, between and expert and an amateur. While I do practice the piano, I don’t feel that I am exercising “effortful study” in order to become an expert. Rather, I have attained a level of skill that I am comfortable with, and over time will improve somewhat, though far less that I would if I was constantly trying to push myself to new levels.

I suppose this begs the question of “what type of motivation would that require”. Although I am sure there are some cases of people pushing themselves to the “expert” level, I would say that for most this would require turning something from a casual hobby into a more devoted study. This would probably introduce external motivators, such as the need to create a successful career, or submitting to the requirements of a professional instructor or trainer.

This is not to say, however, that intrinsic or self motivation cannot push people to great heights. On the contrary, I think that internal motivations can be, and are very powerful. My focus in this article, however is on the motivation which will cause someone to want to be good at something without necessarily becoming an expert.

As a final personal example, when I was younger I was greatly motivated to learn how play chess. I read every book I could find on the subject and loved learning new skills and strategy. However, I was never on a chess team or anything- my motivation to read and learn was purely because I was interested in the game. (You might be wondering why I never joined a chess team, and the answer is I am not quite sure.) The point is, for a period of my life (which, unfortunately, has passed) I worked very hard to learn and research something simply because I was interested in it.

Honestly, I could probably talk for many more pages about things that I do due to internal motivation. While we are all very focused on the extrinsic motivation inherent in class work (probably because it takes up so much of our time), there are certainly many things that we do simply because of personal interest.

Reflection on reflections

I have now completed three reflective posts, one on the CHP, one on voting, and one on getting quiet people to open up. I definitely feel that I am learning as time goes on, though I still have work to do. In terms of style, I feel that I am fairly comfortable with the casual, chatty atmosphere of the blog setting. Unlike a formal essay or report, I am able to say exactly what I am thinking or feeling without having to conform to a specific format, tense, voice, etc. A blog also allows me to “have the floor” as it were and lay my entire idea on the table at once.

I do realize, however, that casual shouldn’t and doesn’t mean vague. This is one area that I can continue to improve on. Instead of talking broadly about a big topic, I need to really delve into a specific idea and search it out. I feel that this is something that will come with practice and that after writing more reflections I will be able to look back and see which ones were vague and which ones were more specific, then be able to learn from them.

I would say that out of the three blogs I have written so far, the second (about voting) was the best and my most recent (about opening up in conversation) was the worst. My explanation for this would be that I never really “got in” to the topic of the third blog. While I did try to talk specifically about a topic, I never really got the big picture motivation for the reflection. I suppose I also felt a bit out of place writing on the topic, because, while I am not a quiet person, I certainly don’t reach out to make new friends like some people do. Basically, I didn’t work hard enough to really delve into the topic, which was a combination of not being totally sure about the topic, and being tired, because I typed it late at night.

On the other hand, I feel that my article on voting was one of my better (out of three, so not really that big of a deal!) articles. I realize that I probably could have been more specific, but I did enjoy the topic and felt that I had a lot to say about it. I was able to talk about a specific idea, that of imperfect voter turn out and also so what relate it to the class.

I guess my biggest thing to learn yet, as I have already mentioned, but which I have realized even more by reflecting on my reflections is the balance of how much I need to investigate or talk about a specific topic. I don’t feel that I have a good understanding yet of what is a “surface” reflection vs. what is a “deep” reflection. Our blogs are certainly not supposed to be heavy reading, but also shouldn’t just waffle around about a general topic.

Another thing that I could do better at is relating the blog to our class discussion. In particular, I didn’t quite get the connection between getting people to open up and what we talked about in class. The first 2 reflections were tangentially related to our class discussion, rather than a further reflection of something specifically talked about in class. Then again, we are really talking about ideas and concepts in class, so writing an article about these general concepts actually is applying what we talked about in class. Again, I feel that with more time I will get a better understanding of how this should be manifested in the blog.

Overall, I feel that I am more or less on the mark for the reflections, but certainly have things that I can improve on. (Prof. Arvan- feel free to comment directly on this if you feel that I am misinformed and need to make more drastic changes.) In the future I would like to try to continue to develop the ability to discuss specific topics in detail. I could also do better at integrating the themes discussed in class into my reflections.

As a closing note, one thing that I don’t think I have to work on is style. Especially after reading the other students blogs, I think that it is readily apparent that we have many and varied ways of writing, even on the same topic. While I did adjust a little bit to account for the blog format, I have been developing my writing style my entire life, and, at this point, have pretty well developed how I approach writing!

Quiet people and conversation

The topic for this week’s reflection is the question of how one can get someone else to open up in conversation. I feel somewhat uncertain as to the basis or reason for this question. I suppose one purpose would be to discuss the issue that in any classroom, it seems that there is always a group of people who are content to just sit and listen to everyone else talk.

While the topic of getting people to talk in class might be interesting, it is secondary to the real question of “how do you get quiet people to talk?” That is perhaps a rather blunt way of asking how one can get into a deep and meaningful conversation with someone who generally wouldn’t talk about such things. I suppose one answer to the first question might be “why do you need to force quiet people to talk anyways, just leave them alone.” However, I think that this answer misses the point of the true question. The issue is more how you break down barriers between people so that you can engage in a heart to heart conversation with them.

I, by nature, tend to freely share my feelings and emotions. However, I can think of at least a few people who would instantly clam up if I asked them a direct and personal question. Clearly a more subtle and less harsh approach is more appropriate and necessary.

I would begin by talking about something completely unrelated. A low key, comfortable topic can allow you to warm up to each other in a non-threatening way. At some point, I would then try to guide the conversation to the more personal topic, though still in a very general sense. If the other person is perceptive they will probably realize what I are doing; therefore if they end the conversation they are basically saying that they don’t want to talk about it. At this point trying to push the topic would do little or no good, in my opinion. However, if the other person responds, then I would gradually try to dig deeper and deeper until we reached the heart of the issue.

Pushing someone to talk when they don’t want too can actually make them harder to reach. On the other hand, some people do need a little prodding to “get them out of there shell” as it were. (As a side note, I am certainly no expert on this topic, but am merely trying to pull together some thoughts on the subject.) This is a fine line, and varies with each situation. I know that my brother will bluntly tell me if he doesn’t want to talk about something, but my having asked will in no way hinder our relationship. On the other hand, if I make someone I don’t know very well uncomfortable, it might be very difficult, or even impossible to ever establish a close relationship with them.

In general, I would say that am never going to change a person, or be able to force them to talk to me if they don’t want to, just by somehow saying and doing the right thing. However, if I approach someone in a careful and nonthreatening manner, I may be able to convince them that I am someone that they can trust and talk to. This really is the essence of the topic. Trust must be established before people will be willing to open up to each other.

On voting and handwashing

In class on Monday we discussed the concept of hand washing, and how difficult it is to perfectly implement this seemingly simple task into the medical field. In this reflection we are asked to consider other situations where a large amount of effort has gone into changing/improving something, but the results still aren't perfect. After thinking about this for a little while, the issue of voter turnout came to mind.

We live in a country which is based on the concept of freedom and representation of the people, yet in the 2008 election voter turnout was only 56.8% (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html). Although this number has risen slightly over the past decade, it is still down from the higher, though still depressingly low, 63.1% turnout in 1960. On “off” years, or non-presidential years, the numbers are even worse, hovering around 38%. Why is it that such a low number of people exercise what could arguably be the most important and significant right of the American people?

Although I don’t have the knowledge to talk about them all, many efforts have been made to increase voter turnout. As an example, at least one major effort to combat this is the “campaign” to associate voting with patriotism and loyalty to one’s country. Sure, my vote might have seemingly little significance (more on that later) in the long run, but the very act of voting shows that I care about my country. The question then, is why aren’t they working? Why do only just over half of the registered voters in America turnout to vote on something as important as who our next president will be?

While I don’t have the answer, the situation does rather parallel the hand washing example discussed in class. It would seem that again time and importance are people’s main excuses for not voting. I know from firsthand experience (being a Republican in Illinois), that, more than likely, my vote will not have an effect in changing the outcome of the election. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t vote anyways. It is the thought of “my vote won’t count anyways” which is so dangerous. Do we want our doctor to abstain from washing his hands before he examines us, just because it “probably won’t matter”? This kind of thinking indicates casualness and apathy towards the situation.

This apathy, coupled with the fact that voting takes time and effort, are a deadly combination. If we can’t convince people that there vote is important, then how are we going to convince them to take time out of there busy schedule to go vote. The issue, then, seems to be centered on convincing people that their vote is important. While I certainly can’t prove this here, I do have at least one thought to consider.

Imagine a situation where 100% of the registered voters voted. How could they argue that there vote doesn’t count? Sure, the president elect will more than likely win by a margin of tens of thousands of votes, but does that really matter? Think of it this way. If I, as a Republican in Illinois (I use this for an example- I don’t wish to get into politics) don’t vote because I don’t think it will matter, and every other Republican does the same thing, then the whole situation becomes ridiculous. People don’t vote, since they think that there vote won’t matter because they know that other people aren’t voting, etc. etc. However, if I could somehow know that 100% of the people in Illinois, whatever their political party, voted, then I could rest assured that my vote was at least cast in the situation where it would most likely have a significance. By that, I mean, if all Republicans voted together with one voice, then, regardless of the outcome, they would all mutually know that they had done the best that they could. Therefore, it would seem that a single vote would count, because everyone would vote with the knowledge that they had the full support of everyone else of their particular political view.

As with hand washing, it seems that we again have a situation which seems so simple, in principal, to fix, yet so hard in reality to accomplish. Until we can convince people that every vote counts, voter turnout will always be low. And how do we convince people that every vote counts when people, by nature, tend to automatically round low probabilities to zero? Actions such as making it easier and simpler or even more patriotic to vote will be of little significance until we address this foundational issue.

I feel as though I have only scratched the surface of a very complicated question, which, honestly, I know relatively little about. I hope, however, that the reader of this post will think honestly about their motivation for either voting or not voting. I know that I personally in thinking about the topic have resolved to increase/continue my voting participation, because, although I am very small in the big picture, I am all important in that voter turnout most certainly can’t be 100% until I vote. Now, if we could all just think this way…